The Tampa Bay Rays’ CEO has threatened to “evaluate alternatives” if Hillsborough County cannot reach a financial agreement with the team for building a stadium in Tampa.
The Rays have proposed building a $2.3 billion ballpark on land now used by Hillsborough College with a timeline of opening in spring 2029. The team has committed to pay for half and all cost overruns, with the rest coming from the county and city of Tampa.
The county commission will hold a workshop on whether to commit tax dollars to the project.
Rays CEO Ken Babby, in an email Wednesday to commissioners, wrote that without a financial agreement “that does not position the team for long-term success,” the team would have “no choice but to evaluate alternatives; however, that is not our desired outcome.”
A copy of the email was obtained by WUSF. It does not specify the alternatives; however, a group in Orlando has long sought to bring Major League Baseball to the region. The group’s former lead investor, Dr. Rick Workman, is a minority owner of the Rays’ new ownership.
“Ultimately, we must decide what the value of Major League Baseball is to our community — from both the tangible benefits of economic impact to the intangible benefits of having pride in your hometown team,” Babby wrote in the email. “We believe Tampa and Hillsborough County residents deserve both the economic benefits and the fan experience that come with a Major League franchise. However, we cannot proceed with an agreement that does not position the team for long-term success.”
The team presented an updated framework to the county ahead of Thursday’s workshop that includes $750 million from the county, $251 million from the city of Tampa, and $64 million from other public sources, to be determined.
The Rays plan to invest more than $8 billion in a multiuse development surrounding the stadium. Taxes on the development through a Community Redevelopment Area would help pay part of the stadium tab. The project includes a rebuilt Hillsborough College paid for by the state.
“The financial framework is foundational to the project’s viability and is essential to advancing the development as envisioned,” Babby wrote. “We have engaged in these discussions in good faith since we acquired the team in October of 2025, with the shared goal of reaching a positive solution that keeps this project in the community, and we have been clear about the minimum terms required to deliver a world-class ballpark and a surrounding mixed-use development.”
The Rays have set a June 1 deadline to complete the financing agreement, “driven by practical constraints, not pressure tactics,” Babby wrote.
“Failure to meet these timelines risks the loss of critical state funding for Hillsborough College, which would render the deal economically infeasible. In addition, missing the 2029 construction timeline would materially increase costs and invalidate the proposed budget.”
Part of the county’s concern has been the use of its portion of a half-cent Community Investment Tax on the stadium construction. Commissioners received an outside legal opinion this week that said doing so would be lawful.
The finding is among the issues on the workshop agenda, which begins at 1:30 p.m. at the Frederick B. Karl County Center, 601 E. Kennedy Blvd., Tampa. The meeting is open to the public, but no comments will be taken and no votes will take place.
ALSO READ: Rays' memorandum specifies requests for stadium deal, asks for CIT funds
Use of the half-cent sales tax has been a controversial issue since it was pitched as part of the team’s request for public financing to complement its share of the construction costs. According to a proposal overview from the team, the county would be asked to contribute $272 million from CIT.
The half-cent sales tax was extended to 2041 by voters in 2024, “to fund infrastructure for transportation and public works, public safety, public facilities, public utilities and public schools.” It renews in December.
Commissioner Ken Hagan, who has been involved in negotiations with the Rays, has said the project cannot go forward without tapping into the CIT funds.
The surtax was first passed in 2006 to also allow funds to help build Raymond James Stadium. At the time of the renewal, however, there was an expectation that it would not be used for new stadium construction. For clarification, the commission voted to get an independent legal opinion in March.
In a memo that will be presented at the workshop, the law firm Bryan Miller Olive concluded the county could use proceeds from the tax because the ballot language did not include an explicit prohibition on stadium financing.
ALSO READ: Analysis touts economic impact of Rays' proposed stadium-anchored development
The opinion reads: “… such a facility can reasonably be classified as a ‘recreational’ public facility under Florida law. The statute governing the surtax allows funding for long-term public infrastructure, including parks and recreational facilities, and courts have historically recognized publicly financed sports venues as serving valid public purposes like recreation, tourism, and economic development.”
The memo also found that a proposed restriction discussed by commissioners, barring CIT funds from being used on a stadium, did not apply “because it was never formally adopted.”
“Additionally, while the current project list funded by the CIT does not include a stadium, it can be amended after a public hearing, meaning the county could still add the project if it follows proper procedures,” it reads.
The workshop agenda also includes a review of the latest Rays proposal and an economic impact analysis developed by consulting firm AECOM.
The latest Rays proposal outlines the roughly $926 million public funding package split between the county and city, still about $75 million short of the team’s $1.001 billion request under a memorandum of understanding.
In addition, the county is being asked for $268 million from tourist development taxes, $132 million in cash or reserves, and $30 million from stormwater-related funds.
At least two commissioners have come out against using the CIT – Chris Boles and the most vocal, Josh Wostal.
On Wednesday, he criticized the latest Rays’ proposal for including county reserves as part of the project. In a social media post, he reiterated he was against using any form of county reserve or surplus tax revenue – whether labeled CIT “excess,” property tax proceeds, or similar mechanisms – to backstop stadium bonds or construction costs.
“At this point, I have to rescind all of the positive things I've said about the new Rays Ownership,” he wrote. “They have … outright lied not only to my face but also the public at multiple meetings. This is them now asking literally for your property taxes. May God have mercy on the soul of anyone that supports this.”
Per the proposal, the city would add $160 million in taxes from the Drew Park Community Redevelopment Area CRA and $64 million from its portion of the CIT.
The economic impact analysis was commissioned by the Tampa Sports Authority, which would manage the new stadium. The AECOM report estimated the ballpark and its surrounding multiuse development would have an economic impact of $75 billion over 30 years.
